HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
practice, be able to undergo the changeover without any increase or decrease in number in order to ensure a smooth transition.
Let us look at the facts.
Since the Urban Council became an organisation comprising wholly of elected Councillors and representatives of District Boards, a total of nearly 40 motions for debate and almost 100 questions for UC Monthly Meetings were put forward in this term up till the end of 1996. That was a few times more compared with the era of appointed Councillors. This suffices to indicate that elected councils have more zest and are of a more accountable nature than appointed councils. No one would refute that.
Another excuse for creating more appointed seats is that such a measure would increase representation from different sectors. People who have said that probably do not understand that the Urban Council has an advisory system to take in talented persons from professional sectors. At present, the Urban Council has 100-odd professional advisors in music, dance, Chinese opera, drama, films, visual arts, libraries, and museums. The contribution of their expertise to Hong Kong has won the Urban Council's profound admiration and appreciation. If Mr. TUNG Chee-hwa has a group of top artists and professionals in mind to serve the Council, then I would suggest that he forward a name list in a day or two to the Urban Council. Every year, the Urban Council renews the employment of its advisors, and we shall consider his suggestions. Of course, those who want to become Councillors should participate in elections. They should not employ filthy means to secure seats for themselves.
Do Hong Kong citizens support the idea of yet another increase in the number of appointed seats in those two council tiers? Do they support a through train for all the Councillors? Is Mr. TUNG aware of the views of the local population or is it that he only listens to the flattery of persuasive talkers and self-interest seekers? I would very much like to hear what the Chief Executive-designate has to say.
Viewing from the angle of council powers, the increase of appointed seats seeks to weaken the strength and undermine the achievements of the Democrats and members of the Democratic Party in the Urban Council and various other councils. However, taking the Urban Council in its entirety, members of the Democratic Party constitute around one-quarter of the number of Urban Councillors. Last year, we put forward 15 motions (some 40 percent) and 40 written questions (56 percent). How come the number of Councillors is to be increased so as to reduce the chances of Democratic motions getting passed? How come there is the most unnatural step of re-appointing election losers like the Provisional Legislature's 'revival of losers'?
I reiterate my strong opposition to the increase of appointed seats. The increase of the number of appointed Councillors is a measure that disrupts the
Page 336 of 498
Page 336 of 498
498
378
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
practice, be able to undergo the changeover without any increase or decrease in number in order to ensure a smooth transition.
Let us look at the facts.
Since the Urban Council became an organisation comprising wholly of elected Councillors and representatives of District Boards, a total of nearly 40 motions for debate and almost 100 questions for UC Monthly Meetings were put forward in this term up till the end of 1996. That was a few times more compared with the era of appointed Councillors. This suffices to indicate that elected councils have more zest and are of a more accountable nature than appointed councils. No one would refute that.
Another excuse for creating more appointed seats is that such a measure would increase representation from different sectors. People who have said that probably do not understand that the Urban Council has an advisory system` to take in talented persons from professional sectors. At present, the Urban Council has 100-odd professional advisors in music, dance, Chinese opera, drama, films, visual arts. libraries, and museums. The contribution of their expertise to Hong Kong has won the Urban Council's profound admiration and appreciation. If Mr. TUNG Chee-hwa has a group of top artists and professionals in mind to serve the Council, then I would suggest that he forward a name list in a day or two to the Urban Council. Every year, the Urban Council renews the employment of its advisors, and we shall consider his suggestions. Of course, those who want to become Councillors should participate in elections. They should not employ filthy means to secure seats for themselves.
Do Hong Kong citizens support the idea of yet another increase in the number of appointed seats in those two council tiers? Do they support a through train for all the Councillors? Is Mr. TUNG aware of the views of the local population or is it that he only listens to the flattery of persuasive talkers and self-interest seekers? I would very much like to hear what the Chief Executive-designate has to say.
Viewing from the angle of council powers, the increase of appointed seats seeks to weaken the strength and undermine the achievements of the Democrats and members of the Democratic Party in the Urban Council and various other councils. However, taking the Urban Council in its entirety, members of the Democratic Party constitute around one-quarter of the number of Urban Councillors. Last year, we put forward 15 motions (some 40 percent) and 40 written questions (56 percent). How come the number of Councillors is to be increased so as to reduce the chances of Democratic motions getting passed? How come there is the most unnatural step of re- appointing election losers like the Provisional Legislature's 'revival of losers'?
I reiterate my strong opposition to the increase of appointed seats. The increase of the number of appointed Councillors is a measure that disrupts the
Page 336 of 498
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.